Complex ascending and aortic arch surgery requires the implementation of different cerebral protection strategies to avoid or limit the probability of intraoperative brain damage during circulatory arrest. The etiology of the damage is multifactorial, involving cerebral embolism, hypoperfusion, hypoxia and inflammatory response. These protective strategies include the use of deep or moderate hypothermia to reduce the cerebral oxygen consumption, allowing the toleration of a variable period of absence of cerebral blood flow, and the use of different cerebral perfusion techniques, both anterograde and retrograde, on top of hypothermia, to avoid any period of intraoperative brain ischemia. In this narrative review, the pathophysiology of cerebral damage during aortic surgery is described. The different options for brain protection, including hypothermia, anterograde or retrograde cerebral perfusion, are also analyzed, with a critical review of the advantages and limitations under a technical point of view. Finally, the current systems of intraoperative brain monitoring are also discussed.

Background: Recent trials showed that TAVI is neither inferior nor superior to surgical aortic valve replacement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of Sutureless and Rapid Deployment Valves (SuRD-AVR) when compared to TAVI in low surgical risk patients with isolated aortic stenosis. Methods: Data from five European Centers were retrospectively collected. We included 1306 consecutive patients at low surgical risk (EUROSCORE II < 4) who underwent aortic valve replacement by means of SuRD-AVR (n = 636) or TAVI (n = 670) from 2014 to 2019. A 1:1 nearest-neighbor propensity-score was performed, and two balanced groups of 346 patients each were obtained. The primary endpoints of the study were: 30-day mortality and 5-year overall survival. The secondary endpoint was 5-year survival freedom from major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs). Results: Thirty-day mortality was similar between the two groups (SuRD-AVR:1.7%, TAVI:2.0%, p = 0.779), while the TAVI group showed a significantly lower 5-year overall survival and survival freedom from MACCEs (5-year matched overall survival: SuRD-AVR: 78.5%, TAVI: 62.9%, p = 0.039; 5-year matched freedom from MACCEs: SuRD-AVR: 64.6%, TAVI: 48.7%, p = 0.004). The incidence of postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) and paravalvular leak grade ≥ 2 (PVL) were higher in the TAVI group. Multivariate Cox Regression analysis identified PPI as an independent predictor for mortality. Conclusions: TAVI patients had a significantly lower five-year survival and survival freedom from MACCEs with a higher rate of PPI and PVL ≥ 2 when compared to SuRD-AVR.

Background: New-onset postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is the most common complication after cardiac surgery, occurring approximately in one-third of the patients. This study considered all-comer patients who underwent cardiac surgery to build a predictive model for POAF. Methods: A total of 3467 (Center 1) consecutive patients were used as a derivation cohort to build the model. The POLARIS score was then derived proportionally from the odds ratios obtained following multivariable logistic regression (MLR). The Brier Score, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and the Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test were used to validate the model. Then, 2272 (Center 2) consecutive patients were used as an external validation cohort. Results: In the overall population (n = 5739), POAF occurred in 32.7% of patients. MLR performed in the derivation cohort showed that age, obesity, chronic renal failure, pulmonary hypertension, minimally invasive surgery, and aortic and mitral valve surgery were predictors of POAF. The derived POLARIS score was used to further stratify the population into four risk clusters: low (1.5–3), intermediate (3.5–5), high (5.5–7), and very high (7.5–9), each progressively showing an increase in POAF incidence. This was confirmed in a correlation analysis (Spearman’s rho: 0.636). Conclusions: The POLARIS score is a simple-to-use tool to stratify patients at higher risk of POAF. Precise identification of such patients might be used to implement clinical practice with the introduction of preoperative antiarrhythmic prophylaxis, further reducing the incidence of POAF and, potentially, its clinical sequelae, despite further investigations being warranted to test this model in prospective studies.

Background The Freedom SOLO (FS) stentless bovine-pericardial prosthesis with a supra-annular implantation technique can be a viable option for patients with endocarditic annular destruction. We assessed early- and long-term outcomes following the use of this prosthesis in extensive aortic valve endocarditis. Methods From 2006 to 2016, 59 patients with extensive aortic endocarditis underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with FS (cumulative follow-up 263 patients-years) in three European centers; all patients presented annular tissue infection, while 54.3% of patients had annular abscess. Results Mean age was 66 ± 11 years and mean EuroSCORE I was 30.3% (standard deviation: 24.1%). In our series, 30.5% of patients had prosthetic valve endocarditis. Early mortality was 15.2% (nine patients). Estimated overall survival at 5 and 10 years was 68.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62.8–75.0%) and 59.1% (95% CI: 66.8–81.2%), respectively. At 10-year survival, freedom from valve-related death was 83.7% (95% CI: 80.9–86.5%). No structural valve deterioration was reported in this series. Five patients (8.5%) had recurrent endocarditis during follow-up and two of them underwent reoperation. Survival freedom from reoperation and endocarditis at 10-year follow-up was 88.0% (CI: 80.4–95.6%) and 86.7% (CI: 80.5–92.9%), respectively. Conclusion FS stentless bioprosthesis is a valuable and simple option to achieve AVR in patients with extensive aortic annulus endocarditis. Although in this group of complex patients, early mortality remains considerably high, late survival outcomes are comparable to the more technically demanding homografts and conventional stentless bioprostheses, with low rates of endocarditis recurrence.

Background: EuroSCORE II (ES2) is a reliable tool for preoperative cardiac surgery mortality risk prediction; however, a patient’s age, a surgical procedure’s weight and the new devices available may cause its accuracy to drift. We sought to investigate ES2 performance related to the surgical risk and late mortality estimation in patients who underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with sutureless valves. Methods: Between 2012 and 2021, a total of 1126 patients with isolated aortic stenosis who underwent surgical AVR by means of sutureless valves were retrospectively collected from six European centers. Patients were stratified into three groups according to the EuroSCORE II risk classes (ES2 < 4%, ES2 4–8% and ES2 > 8%). The accuracy of ES2 in estimating mortality risk was assessed using the standardized mortality ratio (O/E ratio), ROC curves (AUC) and Hosmer–Lemeshow (HL) test for goodness-of-fit. Results: The overall observed mortality was 3.0% (predicted mortality ES2: 5.39%) with an observed/expected (O/E) ratio of 0.64 (confidential interval (CI): 0.49–0.89). In our population, ES2 showed a moderate discriminating power (AUC 0.65, 95%CI 0.56–0.72, p < 0.001; HL p = 0.798). Good accuracy was found in patients with ES2 < 4% (O/E ratio 0.54, 95%CI 0.23–1.20, AUC 0.75, p < 0.001, HL p = 0.999) and for patients with an age < 75 years (O/E ratio 0.98, 95%CI 0.45–1.96, AUC 0.76, p = 0.004, HL p = 0.762). Moderate discrimination was observed for ES2 in the estimation of long-term risk of mortality (AUC 0.64, 95%CI: 0.60–0.68, p < 0.001). Conclusions: EuroSCORE II showed good accuracy in patients with an age < 75 years and patients with ES2 < 4%, while overestimating risk in the other subgroups. A recalibration of the model should be taken into account based on the complexity of actual patients and impact of new technologies.